The "What film?" thread

gingerjon

gingerjon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,628
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
No
If there's interest in doing this we could have a sticky?

Basically, list current available films in the relevant formats with a quick overview of their characteristics, why use them etc.

Possibly also do similar for where to get film processed?
 
yes please, will be a great help for me....

If possible we could also include where to get them.....
 
Right - I'm happy to start off with a bit about TriX and TMax 3200 which I've used a fair bit and also Kodak Color Plus 200 which is cheap, cheerful and makes it look like you took your pictures in 1974.

I'll also do a write-up of Ilford Lab if other people want to do something about other processors.

I'll amend the opening post so that it's a sort of index.

Sound good?
 
Maybe, an example shot from each film. As it comes straight out of the camera without tweaking.
 
Kodak Porta 160VC is what I'm using at the moment a great film for portraiture.

4444124138_06386bceac.jpg


an example taken in a low light situation.

:)
 
RaglanSurf said:
Maybe, an example shot from each film. As it comes straight out of the camera without tweaking.
Click to expand...

LOL..........Soon as you scan the shot becomes corrupted. Each person must find what works for them and IMO, for colour negs, it's a combination of:- lens + film + scanning/scanner, and if you want a print I suppose choice of paper and printer is another variable..........and not forgetting a lot of monitors are different so what you think is spot on might not look so great on some one else's monitor.
So film suggestions is just a start and I've had some excellent shots from Fuji Reala 100asa, Superia 200, Ultramax 400asa and Fuji 800 press.
 
excalibur2 said:
LOL..........Soon as you scan the shot becomes corrupted. Each person must find what works for them and IMO, for colour negs, it's a combination of:- lens + film + scanning/scanner, and if you want a print I suppose choice of paper and printer is another variable..........and not forgetting a lot of monitors are different so what you think is spot on might not look so great on some one else's monitor.
Click to expand...

So if each person has to find what works for them then this is a pretty pointless thread. But I think a basic round up of what to expect from a film is a pretty useful, especially as there seems to be a significant number of folk on here that have never used film at all.

And to be fair, posting a 'SOC shot is as useful as trying to describe what you like about a film. As least folk will be able to see the basic variations.
 
As I said, i certainly will benefit enormously from the opinions of the folks out here who have years of experienced in films photography. A shot will be wondeful
 
ujjwaldey8165 said:
As I said, i certainly will benefit enormously from the opinions of the folks out here who have years of experienced in films photography. A shot will be wondeful
Click to expand...

Well I'll start the ball rolling:- I was pleased with the results from this cheap combo:- Pentax Super Tak 35mm f3.5 on a Praktica MTL3, with Fuji 800asa (outdated cheap off the bay) and developed at Asda for £1..... and I didn't have a tripod.
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/pentax35mm12.jpg

My first attempt at macro with Vivitar 55mm macro and Fuji superior 200asa, developed at Tesco
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/chris820.jpg
 
cant beat fuji velvia....will have to dig out my bronica shots of the london eye, shot on provia i do believe..
 
POAH said:
you can beat fuji velvia when you want realistic skin tones lol
Click to expand...

havent got the foggiest on that on my friend, all my slide work was architecture or landscape...:)

however, when i used film for portraits, esp col neg, would always go for Kodak portra over fuji anyday
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top